Stakeholder Working Group (SWG) Kickoff Meeting May 7, 2020 – Revised

Seward Highway Corridor Study, MP 0-90

1. Welcome, Land Acknowledgement & Introductions

Meeting Focus

3

• Confirm project purpose, expectations, timeline

• Share/discuss emerging themes

• Identify next steps

Land Acknowledgement

4

Dena'inaq ełnen'aq' gheshtnu ch'q'u yeshdu. (Dena'ina)

I live and work on the land of the Dena’ina. (English)

A Land Acknowledgement is a formal statement that recognizes and respects Indigenous Peoples as traditional stewards of this land and the enduring relationship that exists between Indigenous Peoples and their traditional territories.

IntroductionsBrian Lindamood Alaska Railroad Corporation Bruce Jaffa Moose Pass Advisory Planning Commission David Phillips Chugach Alaska David Post Alaska Dept. of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) – Central Region Eric Miyashiro DOT&PF – Central Region Griff Berg United States Forest Service/Chugach National Forest Jerry Fox Girdwood Board of SupervisorsJim Skogstad Hope/Sunrise Advisory Planning Commission John Linnell DOT&PF – Central Region Joselyn Biloon DOT&PF – Central Region Kurt Hensel Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR)Marcus Mueller Kenai Peninsula Borough Marie Heidemann DOT&PF – HeadquartersMike Edgington Girdwood Board of SupervisorsRob Earl DNR

Consultant Team:

Virtual/General Meeting Guidelines

• Follow the lead. • “Mute” is our friend. • There are a lot of us – if you have the

ability, please use your chat box. • We want to see you…if we can. • Repeat your name. • Be patient – we are all learning new

technologies!

2. Project Background, Purpose, Expectations and Schedule

Project Area

8

The focus is on the Seward Highway corridor from

the City of Seward (MP 0)

to the Girdwood intersection

(MP 90).

Background: The Corridor

9

• Part of the National Highway Performance Program

• Designated as a Scenic Byway, an All-American Road, and a National Forest Scenic Byway

• Passes through US Forest Service land and Alaska Department of Natural Resources land

• Passes through Crown Point and Moose Pass (MP 20-35); also considerable private property development between MP 0-8.

Background: The Corridor

10

• Only highway connection and designated freight route between the Kenai Peninsula and the rest of the state

• Land uses include:– Recreational– Subsistence– Residential– Commercial– Institutional

Purpose

11

• The corridor study will:– Identify issues– Forecast growth and development– Identify objectives and challenges– Propose strategies and solutions

The planning process will implement DOT&PF’s new method for interfacing with agencies and communities.

Expectations

Please share – What does the ideal project look like?

1. How can this process/the final study benefit your community/agency?

2. What outcome would make this process/the final product worth your (your entity’s) participation?

Schedule

3. SWG Member Roles, Responsibilities, Potential Meeting

Dates/Topics

SWG Roles + Responsibilities, 1

15

• Act in an advisory capacity, providing input on study activities and products.

• Provide our team with relevant background materials.

• Participate in key informant interviewsand up to five stakeholder meetings.

SWG Roles + Responsibilities, 2

16

• Provide guidance on stakeholder engagement tools and suggest other stakeholder activities for garnering input.

• Identify areas of agreement and solutions that serve the needs of all parties with a stake in the future of the corridor.

• Work productively with other SWG members, project staff and partners even when experiences and opinions differ.

SWG Meeting Dates/Topics

17

• Meeting #1 (today!) – Conduct project kickoff

• Meeting #2 (August 2020) – Present initial findings

• Meeting #3 (November 2020) – Present forecasts + scenarios

• Meeting #4 (January 2021) – Review draft recommendations

• Meeting #5 (March 2021) – Review draft corridor study

4. Stakeholder Engagement Plan

18

Stakeholder Engagement Plan

19

• Outlines approach and schedule for engaging with stakeholders, including how and when to provide input on the draft study and related recommendations.

• Identifies target audiences, outreach activities, communication tools, an outreach schedule and key questions to consider throughout the study process.

S W G

5. Interview Themes by Key Topic

20

Who did we talk to?

21

14 interviews with:• Alaska Department of Natural Resources• Alaska Department of Transportation & Public

Facilities• Alaska Railroad Corporation• Chugach Alaska Corporation• Girdwood Community Council• Hope/Sunrise Advisory Planning Commission • Kenai Peninsula Borough • Moose Pass Advisory Planning Commission • USFS/Chugach National Forest

Interview Themes

Recommended Plans + Resources

22

• Interviewees recommended reviewing 25 different projects and/or studies, plus:– Traffic counts– Visitor survey data– Inventory of infrastructure and facilities

• What other information should we consider?• What information would be helpful, but does

not exist today?

Interview Themes

Existing Conditions

• The corridor creates connections– All of Kenai Peninsula and

Anchorage/Girdwood– Arterial connecting the hubs of Anchorage

and Seward– Sterling Highway

• The corridor serves important travel, business and recreation functions

Interview Themes

Primary Users

• Kenai Peninsula residents• Recreationists • Freight transport

The user base varies by season:• In winter, most corridor users are residents• In summer, also in state and out of state visitors

Interview Themes

User Needs and Conflicts

• Visitors/tourists versus commuters/ residents

• Motorized versus non-motorized users• Larger, slower vehicles (heavy trucks,

recreational vehicles) versus smaller vehicles• Roadside community residents versus those

passing through to end destinations

Interview Themes

Strengths

• Physical Characteristics: beautiful stretch of Alaska

• Access: limited access points means fewer conflicts with turning traffic

• Convenience: generally handles high speed traffic well

Interview Themes

Strengths

• Recreation: creates opportunities to access trails and recreation resources

• Safety: improvements increase safety through straightening curves, new bridges, passing lanes

• Interagency Coordination: agencies and communities are successfully coordinating on avalanche mitigation, 911 emergency response

Interview Themes

Weaknesses: Safety• Narrow sections along the corridor with little to no shoulder

• Occasional avalanche problems

• Lack of enforcement of traffic laws

• Some problematic highway-railroad crossings

• Lack of traffic calming measures (e.g., flashing signs) in places like Moose Pass

• Reduction in state funds for wintertime maintenance

• Contemporary communication standards are not met

• Sections without nearby emergency response and no clear entity responsible for responding to emergencies

Interview Themes

Weaknesses: Recreation

• Limited number of rest stops, wayside facilities

• Lack of a multi-use trail or safe pedestrian option

• Insufficient parking in Turnagain Arm area

• Roadside recreation facilities are aging; many facilities (e.g., trailheads) not being used as originally intended and need redesign

• Roadside attractions such as trailheads should be signed better/earlier

• The potential of the scenic byway is not fully tapped

Interview Themes

Weaknesses: Management• Land status complexity between the Alaska Railroad, Alaska

State Parks and the Department of Transportation

• Lack of defined responsibility for maintenance such as snow plowing, signage and vehicle removal

• Conflicts between small communities and DOT&PF regarding encroachment, location of the right-of-way and perceptions of ownership

• Land surveys do not meet present standards and GIS data quality is often poor

Interview Themes

Weaknesses: Other• Traffic

– Very congested during peak summer weekends; stigma about being crowded and unsafe

– Intersection of the Sterling and Seward Highways is especially bad – High volumes of fuel transported via truck along the highway

• Maintenance– Intermittent flooding issues along the corridor– Some areas where road surface needs improvement– Traffic is increasing while maintenance funds are decreasing

• Access– Near Seward, along the narrowest part of the corridor, there are

many access points creating challenging conditions– Parts of the corridor are very close to private property

Interview Themes

Vision

“Continue to make incremental improvements for the traveling public…but overall, I think it should look similar to how it is today.”

“Not significant changes, really, unless more significant transportation decisions are made such as redirecting cargo from Anchorage to Seward.”

“We need to plan for increased highway usage as population grows. We should plan for accommodations for electric vehicles and other future transportation technology changes….and plan for long-term trend of increased tourism in Alaska which might lead to increased need for accommodation and services along the corridor.”

“I would envision a much, much larger volume of traffic.”

Similar to Today Respond to Growth/Needs

Interview Themes

Opportunities

33

• Interviewees shared recommendations across the following categories:– Maintenance– Management– Recreation– Safety– Traffic

Interview Themes

Opportunities - examples

34

• Maintenance: Reopen Silvertip maintenance station.

• Management: Establish ongoing, regularly scheduled conversations to memorialize the SWG; expanded “Seward Highway Corridor User Group.”

• Recreation: Improve recreation facilities and roadside infrastructure such as bathrooms.

• Safety: Increase traffic enforcement.

• Traffic: Promote expanded transit service from Seward to Girdwood as a business opportunity; this would also alleviate traffic.

Interview Themes

Collaboration

• Overall, most agency representatives feel they are collaborating with the public and with other government agencies well.

• There are sometimes challenges between agencies navigating jurisdictional questions, funding, timelines and involving one another in planning projects.

Interview Themes

Stakeholders – recommended additions to the list

• Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Department of Environmental Conservation • Alaska State Troopers and Anchorage Police Department • National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration • Alaska Concerned citizens groups (Friends of Bird Valley, Concerns Citizens in

Rainbow)• Chugach Electric Association• Alaska Wildlife Conservation Center• Iditarod Historic Trail Committee• Fire and EMS • Special use operators within the corridor (get names from USFS)• Additional tribal organizations (Chenega Corporation, Chenega IRA Council,

Kenaitze Indian Tribe, Native Village of Eklutna, Native Village of Salamatof)• Additional tourism and recreation groups (cruise lines and their associated bussing

companies, nonmotorized users, Alaskaman Extreme Triathlon organizers, Girdwood Trails Committee, active snowmachining groups, Anchorage Mining and Diving)

Interview Themes

6. Emerging Maps

37

Emerging Maps

38

• MP 50-60 – includes Hope Junction

• MP 70-80 – includes Portage Valley

Sample: MP 30-40

Sample: MP 30-40

Sample: MP 30-40

Sample: MP 30-40

Sample: MP 50-60

Sample: MP 50-60

Sample: MP 50-60

Sample: MP 50-60

Sample: MP 70-80

Sample: MP 70-80

Sample: MP 70-80

Sample: MP 70-80

7. Next Steps and Meeting Date

51

Meeting #2 (August 2020)Present initial findings

We’ll send a Doodle poll!

8. Closing Comments

52